University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust: first to comply with the law?

In some ways it’s not a bad thing that they said this out loud - demonstrating that the law is, in fact, the law and has to be followed or there are consequences.

Id have thought using eyes and ears would be cover a lot of the admin considerations on this TBF....

We have consulted with legal experts on the risks of non-compliance with the ruling

What the fuck? They actually thought about not doing it??

Single sex provision is likely to be a more sensitive subject if you have a lot of staff and patients who request it on the basis of religious grounds and it's going to be a lot harder to fight a Sandie Peggie style case if one arise because you can throw Chinese whispers about bacon sandwiches and accusations of racist jokes around to smear your claimants.

Changing rooms is the "easy" bit.

They will also have to make it clear that same sex care is same sex care so will have to finish the what happens next blank page in their processes if someone asks for same sex care.

Plus will have to rip up their trans care policy and offer private rooms to the men and women who would have been placed on the open multi-bed other sexes ward.

And as important get a proper IT system which has sex and gender ( if they plan to record gender) so that the medical records are clear and can be reviewed by staff who have never met the person

Id have thought the risk of a double whammy case is considerable in Birmingham.

My thought was that Birmingham has a higher rate of religious considerations than other cities and therefore is more at risk of getting caught out for religious discrimination rather than merely sex discrimination.

I wonder what drove them to go first? But they are the beginning of all trusts having a realisation that complying with the law is probably for the best I would think

If you provide goods or services to others you can be sued for discrimination and have a ("small" d) duty to follow the law.

The public bodies who are tax funded also have a duty to follow the law and have their staff follow the law.
Staff (policy makers) in carrying out their role have specific ("small" d) duties to assess their choices against the PC listed in section 149 so "Duty" is also the Public Sector Equality Duty which include all persons in the Trusts wider "community" (not just staff).

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/149

149Public sector equality duty
(1)A public authority must, in the exercise of its functions, have due regard to the need to—
(a)eliminate discrimination, harassment, victimisation and any other conduct that is prohibited by or under this Act;
(b)advance equality of opportunity between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it;
(c)foster good relations between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it.
(2)A person who is not a public authority but who exercises public functions must, in the exercise of those functions, have due regard to the matters mentioned in subsection (1).
(3)Having due regard to the need to advance equality of opportunity between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it involves having due regard, in particular, to the need to—
(a)remove or minimise disadvantages suffered by persons who share a relevant protected characteristic that are connected to that characteristic;
(b)take steps to meet the needs of persons who share a relevant protected characteristic that are different from the needs of persons who do not share it;
(c)encourage persons who share a relevant protected characteristic to participate in public life or in any other activity in which participation by such persons is disproportionately low.
(4)The steps involved in meeting the needs of disabled persons that are different from the needs of persons who are not disabled include, in particular, steps to take account of disabled persons' disabilities.
(5)Having due regard to the need to foster good relations between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it involves having due regard, in particular, to the need to—
(a)tackle prejudice, and
(b)promote understanding.
(6)Compliance with the duties in this section may involve treating some persons more favourably than others; but that is not to be taken as permitting conduct that would otherwise be prohibited by or under this Act.
(7)The relevant protected characteristics are—

• age;
• disability;
• gender reassignment;
• pregnancy and maternity;
• race;
• religion or belief;
• sex;
• sexual orientation.

I hope you are right.

It's great news that they are going to follow the law, but the message feels a bit like 'we tried very hard to see if we could get away with continuing to break it...'

The cynic in me wonders if they’ve been threatened with an employment tribunal?

Hurray for that. May all the others see the light and follow quickly.

One point though: surely individuals are not duty bearers under the Act? I, as a private person, do not have to obey it. It's organisations, public bodies, companies etc that do.

Would like to think that they are just trying to manage the potential backlash from the TRA lobby whilst reinstating women's rights and protections, but suspect you are more right in your interpretation!!

Every person, employer and public organisation has a duty to comply with the Act like any other law...

We have consulted with legal experts on the risks of non-compliance with the ruling and have acted accordingly...

Controlled durgs, Paying wages...

Some staff should not be employed in management position at all....

We don’t really want to ensure women’s safety and dignity but the law is forcing us to.